The official responses of any large organisation are typically vividly different from individual opinions by human necessity. I'm mostly referring to the people, servicemen or civilians, who seem to think that anyone who disagrees with anything any serviceman does is disrespectful. Respect is earned, and entitlement is an individual thing. Don't like it? Tough luck. A history of service to a country doesn't trumph freedom of opinion or the democratic process.Wraith wrote:
According to that report the only response from the marines was "who cares, we're not moving". That doesn't sound 'butt-hurt' to me. What it does sound like is a group of anti-war protestors pissing on the people who volunteer to take a lot of shit for their benefit, and some politician going way over-board in response for it.mikkel wrote:
For how badass the Marines are supposed to be, they get butt-hurt pretty fast whenever people don't agree with what they stand for.
Honestly, these people need to accept that not everyone is going to agree with them, and just get over it. Just like everyone else does.
I believe the marines deserve respect for choosing to risk their lives in order to keep safe their family, friends country and ideals. They don't go to war for fun, they go because the politicians tell them to. We may not think the conflicts they are involved in are right or just (I personally disagree with being in Iraq), but that is down to the politicians, not the soldiers. The marines deserve the respect of the population, the same way EVERY SINGLE member of the armed forces deserve it.
The other issue is taking the funding from the town. This I also think is absolute idiocy. He basically wants to take away money that could be used to improve the education system, health system etc etc because of a few idiots comments. Basically punishing everyone - man, woman or child - for someone elses beliefs. How would he like it if, for example, the police towed and crushed his car because a guy living at the other end of the town made a racist remark.
Well technically, in order for their to be freedom of opinion or the democratic process, there was first a history of service to a country. So yeah, it does.mikkel wrote:
The official responses of any large organisation are typically vividly different from individual opinions by human necessity. I'm mostly referring to the people, servicemen or civilians, who seem to think that anyone who disagrees with anything any serviceman does is disrespectful. Respect is earned, and entitlement is an individual thing. Don't like it? Tough luck. A history of service to a country doesn't trumph freedom of opinion or the democratic process.Wraith wrote:
According to that report the only response from the marines was "who cares, we're not moving". That doesn't sound 'butt-hurt' to me. What it does sound like is a group of anti-war protestors pissing on the people who volunteer to take a lot of shit for their benefit, and some politician going way over-board in response for it.mikkel wrote:
For how badass the Marines are supposed to be, they get butt-hurt pretty fast whenever people don't agree with what they stand for.
Honestly, these people need to accept that not everyone is going to agree with them, and just get over it. Just like everyone else does.
I believe the marines deserve respect for choosing to risk their lives in order to keep safe their family, friends country and ideals. They don't go to war for fun, they go because the politicians tell them to. We may not think the conflicts they are involved in are right or just (I personally disagree with being in Iraq), but that is down to the politicians, not the soldiers. The marines deserve the respect of the population, the same way EVERY SINGLE member of the armed forces deserve it.
The other issue is taking the funding from the town. This I also think is absolute idiocy. He basically wants to take away money that could be used to improve the education system, health system etc etc because of a few idiots comments. Basically punishing everyone - man, woman or child - for someone elses beliefs. How would he like it if, for example, the police towed and crushed his car because a guy living at the other end of the town made a racist remark.
Without the service, there is no process.
Granted, I dont think servicemen should be granted some sort of immunity from law, etc. but they should be granted respect.
It absolutely does not. Fighting for a democracy is fighting for equality. If you're coming out of military service as something more than any commoner, you weren't fighting for democracy, you were fighting against it.Ghandi767 wrote:
Well technically, in order for their to be freedom of opinion or the democratic process, there was first a history of service to a country. So yeah, it does.mikkel wrote:
The official responses of any large organisation are typically vividly different from individual opinions by human necessity. I'm mostly referring to the people, servicemen or civilians, who seem to think that anyone who disagrees with anything any serviceman does is disrespectful. Respect is earned, and entitlement is an individual thing. Don't like it? Tough luck. A history of service to a country doesn't trumph freedom of opinion or the democratic process.Wraith wrote:
According to that report the only response from the marines was "who cares, we're not moving". That doesn't sound 'butt-hurt' to me. What it does sound like is a group of anti-war protestors pissing on the people who volunteer to take a lot of shit for their benefit, and some politician going way over-board in response for it.
I believe the marines deserve respect for choosing to risk their lives in order to keep safe their family, friends country and ideals. They don't go to war for fun, they go because the politicians tell them to. We may not think the conflicts they are involved in are right or just (I personally disagree with being in Iraq), but that is down to the politicians, not the soldiers. The marines deserve the respect of the population, the same way EVERY SINGLE member of the armed forces deserve it.
The other issue is taking the funding from the town. This I also think is absolute idiocy. He basically wants to take away money that could be used to improve the education system, health system etc etc because of a few idiots comments. Basically punishing everyone - man, woman or child - for someone elses beliefs. How would he like it if, for example, the police towed and crushed his car because a guy living at the other end of the town made a racist remark.
Without the service, there is no process.
Granted, I dont think servicemen should be granted some sort of immunity from law, etc. but they should be granted respect.
Servicemen shouldn't be granted respect by definition, because respect is an individual thing. That's a pretty logical concept. If you respect military service, that's your choice, but simply disagreeing with someone or something isn't disrespectful.
You're right, respect is earned. My opinion is that by choosing to stand for what they believe in and risking their lives to protect their country they already have earned my respect.mikkel wrote:
The official responses of any large organisation are typically vividly different from individual opinions by human necessity. I'm mostly referring to the people, servicemen or civilians, who seem to think that anyone who disagrees with anything any serviceman does is disrespectful. Respect is earned, and entitlement is an individual thing. Don't like it? Tough luck. A history of service to a country doesn't trumph freedom of opinion or the democratic process.Wraith wrote:
According to that report the only response from the marines was "who cares, we're not moving". That doesn't sound 'butt-hurt' to me. What it does sound like is a group of anti-war protestors pissing on the people who volunteer to take a lot of shit for their benefit, and some politician going way over-board in response for it.mikkel wrote:
For how badass the Marines are supposed to be, they get butt-hurt pretty fast whenever people don't agree with what they stand for.
Honestly, these people need to accept that not everyone is going to agree with them, and just get over it. Just like everyone else does.
I believe the marines deserve respect for choosing to risk their lives in order to keep safe their family, friends country and ideals. They don't go to war for fun, they go because the politicians tell them to. We may not think the conflicts they are involved in are right or just (I personally disagree with being in Iraq), but that is down to the politicians, not the soldiers. The marines deserve the respect of the population, the same way EVERY SINGLE member of the armed forces deserve it.
The other issue is taking the funding from the town. This I also think is absolute idiocy. He basically wants to take away money that could be used to improve the education system, health system etc etc because of a few idiots comments. Basically punishing everyone - man, woman or child - for someone elses beliefs. How would he like it if, for example, the police towed and crushed his car because a guy living at the other end of the town made a racist remark.
Your respect, yeah, and that's fine. It's also fine if that failed to earn them someone else's respect. That's all I'm getting at.Wraith wrote:
You're right, respect is earned. My opinion is that by choosing to stand for what they believe in and risking their lives to protect their country they already have earned my respect.mikkel wrote:
The official responses of any large organisation are typically vividly different from individual opinions by human necessity. I'm mostly referring to the people, servicemen or civilians, who seem to think that anyone who disagrees with anything any serviceman does is disrespectful. Respect is earned, and entitlement is an individual thing. Don't like it? Tough luck. A history of service to a country doesn't trumph freedom of opinion or the democratic process.Wraith wrote:
According to that report the only response from the marines was "who cares, we're not moving". That doesn't sound 'butt-hurt' to me. What it does sound like is a group of anti-war protestors pissing on the people who volunteer to take a lot of shit for their benefit, and some politician going way over-board in response for it.
I believe the marines deserve respect for choosing to risk their lives in order to keep safe their family, friends country and ideals. They don't go to war for fun, they go because the politicians tell them to. We may not think the conflicts they are involved in are right or just (I personally disagree with being in Iraq), but that is down to the politicians, not the soldiers. The marines deserve the respect of the population, the same way EVERY SINGLE member of the armed forces deserve it.
The other issue is taking the funding from the town. This I also think is absolute idiocy. He basically wants to take away money that could be used to improve the education system, health system etc etc because of a few idiots comments. Basically punishing everyone - man, woman or child - for someone elses beliefs. How would he like it if, for example, the police towed and crushed his car because a guy living at the other end of the town made a racist remark.
Can Berkeley even do that? Under what grounds can they just kick people out? Seems like it would violate free speech or something.
Technically didnt kick them out and no, they couldnt actually kick them out AFAIK. They called them unwelcome and intruders and essentially gave a protest group a front-row seat to heckle the station.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Can Berkeley even do that? Under what grounds can they just kick people out? Seems like it would violate free speech or something.
Yet im sure they like the Scientology chruches recruit people all day er'day
15 more years! 15 more years!
If the city council doesn't like civic virtue and service, they can go...well...you know.
While everyone is entitled to their opinions, this seems like a hypocritical way to advance any type of liberal cause. (Unless villifying liberals by protesting servicemen is their thing again...I just don't think they should be looking for the title of "vengeful hippies.")
Perhaps they should protest their own positions, as they don't seem to be serving their constituents well. "What $2,100,000?"
While everyone is entitled to their opinions, this seems like a hypocritical way to advance any type of liberal cause. (Unless villifying liberals by protesting servicemen is their thing again...I just don't think they should be looking for the title of "vengeful hippies.")
Perhaps they should protest their own positions, as they don't seem to be serving their constituents well. "What $2,100,000?"
Last edited by RAIMIUS (2008-02-01 22:53:30)
lmfaoLocoloki wrote:
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/US/02/07/be … rs.cnn.jpg
lol at pink signs. lol at whats on the sign as well.Locoloki wrote:
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/US/02/07/be … rs.cnn.jpg
there is a whole 6 people there doing this
The 'enlightened' ones in code-pink believe that we as a society have progressed to a point where we can reason with our enemies and thereby avoid violence. This delusion works only with people who are willing to reason and share similar ideals. our current fanatical enemies do not wish to reason with us - they wish to remove our culture and replace it with their own. one might make the argument that we in the west are attempting to do that to the rest of the world by spreading democracy. unfortunately the conservative religious fanatics see democracy as a way of invasion of foreign influences and corrupted morals so they fight it tooth-and-nail. In relatively few cases has the Muslim world been conquered or at least assimilated. more often, it seems like they are the ones doing the conquering. i just hope that these code-pink people realize what a mistake they made when they are buried hip deep in the ground and we have a circle of men standing around them with fist sized rocks chanting for their death. good luck with that. maybe then they'd ask for help from a Marine.
i'd say code-pink should be more interested in complaining about American women getting arrested for sitting next to a non-relative in Starbucks in Saudi Arabia. also the stoning of women in Iran for 'adultery', and the honor killings in Pakistan, and the ... They NEVER picket any of these countries foreign embassies or complain in the least. rather, they'd prefer to stab in the front our only way of defending ourselves against barbarism. it's very perplexing.
by the way - you go Marines! Loved the commercial with the silent drill team.
i'd say code-pink should be more interested in complaining about American women getting arrested for sitting next to a non-relative in Starbucks in Saudi Arabia. also the stoning of women in Iran for 'adultery', and the honor killings in Pakistan, and the ... They NEVER picket any of these countries foreign embassies or complain in the least. rather, they'd prefer to stab in the front our only way of defending ourselves against barbarism. it's very perplexing.
by the way - you go Marines! Loved the commercial with the silent drill team.
odd, I thought recruiting stations served all branches. Why is the USMC singled out? Remove one office, remove all recruiters. Something doesnt sound right.
more of a recruiting sign. especially pink for the Marines!Locoloki wrote:
http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/US/02/07/be … rs.cnn.jpg
I kid.
i wonder what code pink thinks of this white sign:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ … 0&only
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ … 0&only
Last edited by CaptainSpaulding71 (2008-02-08 16:38:52)
http://www.nbc11.com/news/15245031/deta … dlineclick
apparently Berkeley values and opinions are for sale.
They were gunna loose govt. funding because of their hard nosed stance toward the marine recruiting center so they apologized.
Gotta love those tough ass liberals who know how to take a stand. lol
apparently Berkeley values and opinions are for sale.
They were gunna loose govt. funding because of their hard nosed stance toward the marine recruiting center so they apologized.
Gotta love those tough ass liberals who know how to take a stand. lol
I think banning the Marines is bad, but actually threatening to cut off Funding is just as bad, if not maybe worse. As it affects a larger group of people in a worse way. Collective Punishment - I thought that only applies to Palestinians
So, to sum up. The world is full of dicks.
So, to sum up. The world is full of dicks.
Last edited by Mek-Izzle (2008-02-09 08:41:10)
I think it is bad to shit all over the very people that protects your right to be liberal, cocksuckin', apologist.Mek-Izzle wrote:
I think banning the Marines is bad, but actually threatening to cut off Funding is just as bad, if not maybe worse. As it affects a larger group of people in a worse way. Collective Punishment - I thought that only applies to Palestinians
So, to sum up. The world is full of dicks.
I never said it wasn't bad
no, you can't believe the nerve of cutting funding to berkeley when they clearly do not support the very people that is charged with their protection.Mek-Izzle wrote:
I never said it wasn't bad
Serves them right.....It also fits right in line with the liberal apologist attitude. Their opinions and attitudes are for sale.... go figure
Last edited by lowing (2008-02-09 09:07:45)
Does that mean that they can stop paying federal taxes, too?lowing wrote:
no, you can't believe the nerve of cutting funding to berkeley when they clearly do not support the very people that is charged with their protection.Mek-Izzle wrote:
I never said it wasn't bad
Serves them right.....It also fits right in line with the liberal apologist attitude. Their opinions and attitudes are for sale.... go figure
then they stop getting any kind of federal services, not just direct funding.mikkel wrote:
Does that mean that they can stop paying federal taxes, too?lowing wrote:
no, you can't believe the nerve of cutting funding to berkeley when they clearly do not support the very people that is charged with their protection.Mek-Izzle wrote:
I never said it wasn't bad
Serves them right.....It also fits right in line with the liberal apologist attitude. Their opinions and attitudes are for sale.... go figure
So they don't get all their money's worth? If they're paying for it, how can they have it taken away?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
then they stop getting any kind of federal services, not just direct funding.mikkel wrote:
Does that mean that they can stop paying federal taxes, too?lowing wrote:
no, you can't believe the nerve of cutting funding to berkeley when they clearly do not support the very people that is charged with their protection.
Serves them right.....It also fits right in line with the liberal apologist attitude. Their opinions and attitudes are for sale.... go figure
Last edited by mikkel (2008-02-09 13:55:19)